FWIW, I've built a Hackintosh running a 6700k with Z170x chipset (using Clover boot loader).  
 
If you're a composer using a Hackintosh with VE Pro (with one machine as slave and another as master), Jumbo Packets on the LAN port is critical for achieving high disk-streaming polyphony from Kontakt 5/etc.
We've got many clients running VE Pro Master/Slave (multi-machine) configurations...
We're quite familiar with the scenario.  
 
As great in theory as a Hackintosh is (and I get your point about building using better hardware choices than currently available from Apple)... and as close to a Mac as it may be...
It's still not a real Mac.  The devil is in the details.
 
Right now, the fastest Mac you can buy is the latest 27" iMac with Skylake 6700k.
It outperforms the $4000 Mac Pro.
 

tzzsmk
1) if we agree on fact professional environment means closed ecosystem without "random" updates, then it doesn't matter if you block updates on real mac or hackintosh

In a recording/live music environment "professional" mean it works as designed, runs all necessary hardware and software and does so reliably, day in, day out. It also often means that in an emergency you can obtain a direct replacement in 24-48 hours (or less), load it from a disk image backup and it "just works". Or even borrow one if yours acts up in the afternoon soundcheck and have the loaned one configured and installed with your system image by the time the gig starts.

Hackintoshes rarely seem to be that reliable, and certainly aren't easily replaceable in a foreign country or even a city you don't know. As for not installing updates, that leaves you wide open to security problems and means you get no bug fixes, maybe can't use more up to date audio interface drivers and so on.

Reading stuff online about do it yourself Macs reminds me of when the best Linux distribution was Slackware and it came on a bunch of floppy disks. It worked quite well. Most of the basics required in a *nix system were there, even a basic X Windows server and client, but there was a very great deal of "ah, if you want a driver for that, or a program to do such and such...... Why not help the community and write it yourself!" Fine if you have the knowledge, skills and time to do that, or even just the ability to follow the instructions to compile a new customised kernel containing the right drivers, but not particularly useful to the average computer user who wants to write a novel, design a billboard poster or record and produce some music.

Most people aren't computer-knowledgable enough to want to enter the world of assembling parts for a Windows PC, never mind building something like a d-i-y Mac.

And running a Hackintosh means you are likely to be running at least the operating system outside the terms of its license, which in a commercial environment may just make the lawyers a bit nervous.

tzzsmk
5) real MacPro costs much more money and lacks PCIexpress slots and SATA ports, so in terms of expandability, it comes down to either buying oldschool MacPro, or building hackintosh

True, Macs cost more than an equivalent PC. And the dustbin-style MacPro has badly needed an update (or quietly dropping from the range) for years, as Jim says the iMac is a better choice for DAW use.

For DAW purposes expandability of modern Macs (apart from the one with the single socket) isn't too much of a problem thanks to Thunderbolt and USB3. Drives can be added using either interface and UAD, for example, make Thunderbolt versions of their cards. The cost is currently high, but in some ways Thunderbolt reminds me of when PCI replaced ISA or USB first appeared. Matching hardware was originally expensive but the price dropped eventually. And for mobile use a MacBook is more expandable than any laptop PC that lacks Thunderbolt ports.

My MacBook Pro was a darn fine portable rig. Running Snow Leopard and Logic 9, it was rock solid and the performance was incredible. Great OS, good hardware, incredible app - it made for a terrific DAW. Studio One also ran great on it.
 
Things started going downhill when I upgraded the OS in order to be able to update certain plug-ins which required a newer one. I now use it as an internet machine but the OS upgrades really messed up what was a solid machine. I'll probably end up ordering the Snow Leopard DVD and doing a clean install of that.
 
I upgraded to an iMac in 2014. I decided never to upgrade the OS (Mavericks) and to only run software that was more or less contemporary to my computer. This seems to be the key to longevity with Apple products. 
 
The iMac runs great. Performance is more than sufficient for my needs - though I am absolutely convinced that the same hardware running Snow Leopard and Logic 9 would perform twice as well.
 
Apple software just isn't as streamlined and solid as it once was. They're rolling out major OS releases on a yearly basis and trying to make all of that interact with their mobile OS, which is also constantly updated - so the legendary rock solid, stable Mac OS is now just that - legendary.
 
Still beats Windows if you ask me, but that's a matter of personal preference.
 
The iMac is a good machine, plenty enough for a personal/home studio, imho. 
 
The bad news for me is that Sonar for Mac won't run on Mavericks - and I'm NOT upgrading OS. I guess I could try and run it on my MacBook Pro, but, though it runs a El Capitan, it's an old machine which probably won't meet the requirements. 
 
Hence, I'll probably end up putting a PC together, anyway.
 
 

I think the minis are really useful.  I've used mine like a regular computer, moved it by the tv and used it for media directly into the tv.  Now it sits headless in my rack being an iTunes/media server or if I want to use Main Stage for a few of it's synths or effects.  btw - Main Stage is a great cheap apple music app that will get some more use out of whatever mac you buy. 

For what it's worth, the combination of Sierra and iOS10 seems much more reliable than previous OS versions. Previously getting the two to work together properly could sometimes involve switching bluetooth or networking off then on again. Running Lemur on an ipad connected to a Mac by wi-fi MIDI networking takes step sequencing down some very interesting routes.

I've found Yosemite onwards to be solid and stable. Like I said, maybe I've been lucky but I seem to have pretty much managed to avoid the problems some people have reported. My main complaint is with Logic Pro's cpu usage and how it handles threading when monitoring through Logic, but recent updates have helped some with that.

I just wish Logic handled MIDI ports like Sonar does rather than summing all input ports into a single stream as it enters Logic. So unlike Sonar you can't choose different MIDI input ports for tracks but have to route everything just by MIDI channel numbers. It would also help if Apple put out the kind of detailed manuals and documentation Cakewalk do.

tlw
For what it's worth, the combination of Sierra and iOS10 seems much more reliable than previous OS versions. Previously getting the two to work together properly could sometimes involve switching bluetooth or networking off then on again. Running Lemur on an ipad connected to a Mac by wi-fi MIDI networking takes step sequencing down some very interesting routes.

I've found Yosemite onwards to be solid and stable. Like I said, maybe I've been lucky but I seem to have pretty much managed to avoid the problems some people have reported. My main complaint is with Logic Pro's cpu usage and how it handles threading when monitoring through Logic, but recent updates have helped some with that.

I just wish Logic handled MIDI ports like Sonar does rather than summing all input ports into a single stream as it enters Logic. So unlike Sonar you can't choose different MIDI input ports for tracks but have to route everything just by MIDI channel numbers. It would also help if Apple put out the kind of detailed manuals and documentation Cakewalk do.

Did you download all the manuals? The main one alone is 1043 pages - and then there's one for effects, one for automation, another for and one for instruments, control surface support. 
 
I'm not sure how familiar with it you are, so maybe you've already tried to no avail, but I believe that the environment should allow you to configure your MIDI inputs the way you want them. I've never worked with more than one port at a time, so I may be mistaken there. 
 
I admit I have yet to find the time to go through the manuals for Logic X, having read the ones for Logic 9 and the certification manuals, I usually just look up things if I can't figure out the answer myself. The fundamentals stay the same, pretty much, at least for the way I work.

Rain 
I'm not sure how familiar with it you are, so maybe you've already tried to no avail, but I believe that the environment should allow you to configure your MIDI inputs the way you want them. I've never worked with more than one port at a time, so I may be mistaken there. 
 

Using the Environment, you have amazing flexibility to setup custom MIDI routing/processing.

It's specifically the lack of documentation of the MIDI environment that's one of my main gripes with Logic. Another is that while the OS Core MIDI studio lets you combine and route hardware, software and networked MIDI very easily it's almost completely ignored by Logic. So while MIDI Studio allows for lots of MIDI ports and handles them fine, Logic sums all incoming MIDI into a single sequencer input which in effect strips out the different ports presenting Logic with a single MIDI port.

This can be a problem if you have, for example, two hardware units both tied to channel 1 and want to use both of them at the same time. In Sonar it's just a matter of selecting the correct MIDI port as track input for a couple of MIDI tracks. Not possible in Logic, or if it is extensive forum searching fails to turn up a workable solution for how it can be done and considerable complaints that it can't be done. There are also issues with routing a single MIDI controller keyboard to various different hardware synths. It can be done, but Sonar does it better.

Another is how cpu threading of software-monitoring was handled, though recent updates have helped a lot with that. The original way it was done ended up pretty much shoving all live monitored tracks through a single core, which is a problem if you use hardware synths and want to apply effects to them before recording the audio. Sonar is far better at handling that sort of thing.

A single instance of Amplitube running as an AU plugin can still pretty much bring a current top end MacBook Pros (i7, 2.2GHz, 16GB RAM) to it's knees at 64 or 128 sample latency, though I suspect IK are to blame there - Amplitube stand-alone also uses much more cpu on my Macs than on similar Windows PC laptops. Nothing else seems to, just Amplitube. Fortunately I can easily live without Amplitube.

It will be interesting to see how Sonar for Macs compares.

tlw
A single instance of Amplitube running as an AU plugin can still pretty much bring a current top end MacBook Pros (i7, 2.2GHz, 16GB RAM) to it's knees at 64 or 128 sample latency, though I suspect IK are to blame there - Amplitube stand-alone also uses much more cpu on my Macs than on similar Windows PC laptops. Nothing else seems to, just Amplitube. Fortunately I can easily live without Amplitube.

 
FWIW,
2.2GHz with a mobile i7 CPU is significantly slower than a tower/desktop running a standard i7 at 4+GHz.
Huge difference in performance...
 

True.

But on a similar spec PC laptop to the Macbook there's still quite a difference in cpu usage. Can't test for differences as a plugin as I don't have a suitable Mac+Windows DAW and can't be bothered to install a demo version of something on both computers.